Wednesday, April 23, 2008

You'd think so. I mean, I started a blog with the url "xkcdsucks". But I don't think it really sucks, on the whole. It's just that it's sucking more than it used to and getting worse. I started reading in the summer of 2007 and liked it, but increasingly I've noticed that Randall is just making computer science jokes. Not even jokes - just referring to random programming ideas or patterns and acting like it's a joke. Acting like it's kind of cool to refer to nerdy things in a webcomic. Either that, or he does a "cute nerdy relationship" comic, which are beginning to get very, very irritating.

Luckily, I have been taught to back up claims with empirical evidence, so here you go:That's a chart of the first 400 xkcd comics, and how frequent certain themes were. Computer jokes have risen dramatically. The x-axis measures comics going forward in time, and the y-axis measures density of joke types (a point at the very top of the graph indicated 80% of the jokes at that time were of that theme, a point at the bottom indicates 0%)

And then of course he occasionally hits you with something like 383 which just comes out of nowhere and smacks you upside the head while yelling "expecting, that, bitch? Didn't think so!" I guess it's his artistic, meaningful side? As you once said, communicating badly and then acting smug when you're misunderstood is not cleverness. And being cryptic and weird and then acting smug (which you know you are when you posted that, it's not like you're sitting there regretting it) is not artistic, nor is it funny.

Anyway, because I do think there is a lot to like about XKCD (two examples: the aforementioned 169 and also 262) do not expect this to be a website where I just complain all the time. If something is good, I'll say so. If something only sucks a little, I won't give it any flack it doesn't deserve. And I will do my best to always link to xkcd.com. Oh and I refer to comics by number, not name. Just easier.

PS - if you are curious as to what I think doesn't suck, head on over to www.qwantz.com for Dinosaur Comics, which are great.

Posted by
Carl

12 comments:

Your x-axis needs to be labeled more clearly. How often are you putting down a data point? I'd also be interested in seeing a straight number-of-this-type-of-comic-per-week graph as opposed to a density graph in order to get a better sense of the trend.

Finally, I'm tempted to argue against the nature of your dislike of the "cute nerdy relationship" comics, except that I kind of agree.

(Yes, I do need to write this as a comment while sitting three feet from you.)

OK fine. Here is how it works - each tick mark on the x axis (there are 40 in all) represents 10 comics. The first 10 comics are represented in the line 1 unit from the origin, numbers 11-20 are in the line 2 tick marks away, etc. How high the point is on the Y axis represents how many comics of that type appeared in the 10 day segment. So you can think of the y-axis as the actually number per time unit, as you request (though I went for 10 comics, about 3 weeks, rather than 1 week). But it can also be read in terms of density.

I know that this is a blast from the past and everything, but I was wondering: by 'computer science', do you mean actual computer science - algorithms, program structure, etc - or do you mean computers, the Internet, operating systems, and general nerdiness?

I'm pretty sure he wasn't smug about 383. It seems to me like he was trying to take responsibility for a friend's happiness, who then killed herself. It's not very fucking fun to be in that situation, I'm sure his feelings for that comic were pretty goddamn far from smug.

What the hell is this?

Welcome. This is a website called XKCD SUCKS which is about the webcomic xkcd and why we think it sucks. My name is Carl and I used to write about it all the time, then I stopped because I went insane, and now other people write about it all the time. I forget their names. The posts still seem to be coming regularly, but many of the structural elements - like all the stuff in this lefthand pane - are a bit outdated. What can I say? Insane, etc.

I started this site because it had been clear to me for a while that xkcd is no longer a great webcomic (though it once was). Alas, many of its fans are too caught up in the faux-nerd culture that xkcd is a part of, and can't bring themselves to admit that the comic, at this point, is terrible. While I still like a new comic on occasion, I feel that more and more of them need the Iron Finger of Mockery knowingly pointed at them. This used to be called "XKCD: Overrated", but then it fell from just being overrated to being just horrible. Thus, xkcd sucks.

Here is a comic about me that Ann made. It is my favorite thing in the world.

Frequently Asked Questions

Divided into two convenient categories, based on whether you think this website

Rob's Rants

When he's not flipping a shit over prescriptivist and descriptivist uses of language, xkcdsucks' very own Rob likes writing long blocks of text about specific subjects. Here are some of his excellent refutations of common responses to this site. Think of them as a sort of in-depth FAQ, for people inclined to disagree with this site.